The simultaneous and uncontested election of Paris and Los Angeles to host the 2024 and 2028 Games, respectively, highlights the diminishing attractiveness of the Games. Considered too costly and disproportionate, a part of public opinion, particularly in the major candidate cities, is opposed to their city's bid. This criticism of the Games has affected the bids. Since the 2000s, the bids have become increasingly detailed, including particularly comprehensive information on the city, the Olympic urban project and its legacy. The fear of the "white elephants" in Athens in 2004 counterbalances the image of the Games of Sydney in 2000 and "Barcelona model" in 1992.The Paris bid for 2024 was defined by its objective of budgetary restraint. This objective, shared by the bids for Tokyo 2016 and 2020, as well as Los Angeles for 2024 (elected for 2028), suggests that the values attached to the Olympic Games and the urban project have changed. Paris 2024’s budgetary restraint is justified by an urban project that is fully integrated into the city, limited investment in sports facilities (most of which already exist), and an apparent lack of investment in transport infrastructure. Yet, in Paris’s bid, transport is at the heart of the urban project. The aim of this article is to understand how the organisers are able to present the Paris Games as modest in terms of budget, considering their ambitions include the regeneration of the northern suburbs of Paris, thanks to massive investment over several decades in urban renewal around the Stade de France, and new transport infrastructure. Taking into account the Grand Paris Express, and the importance of its construction for the Paris 2024 Games, how and why did the bid’s sponsors omit the cost of the GPE (which include stations close to the Olympic venues) from the budget for Paris 2024?